Originally posted by troyz 1980's Bayonet Takumars.
(Not to say these are necessarily bad lenses. . . I just don't understand why Pentax ever produced them. . .)
Here I can chime in. Why buy lenses with inferior coating, when one can have the smc versions?
But I have a long list of lenses, I won't buy - or won't use, even if I had bought one:
- FA 77mm Limited - as I have the FA 85/1.4 (otherwise I would have been tempted)
- any 50mm lens slower than 1.4
- the smc-A 28-135/4 - nicely made, but I never liked it, sold it on after 10 years of not using it
- FA 20-35/4 - the same as the 28-135 for me, never liked it and sold it a couple of months ago
- the old 135-600mm Pentax zoom, too much of a monster lens. At least I would need an assistant to go with it...
I am more relaxed about super-zooms now. I bought a Tamron 18-200, because the price was good and I wanted something for the occasional stroll without much equipment - and I wanted a lens, I can give to my partner for travelling, after I bought her a K-m for Christmas. I used it once yet, and it is not really good - but not quite as bad, as I expected...
Ben